From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756685AbZDWSAv (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:00:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753524AbZDWSAm (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:00:42 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:33257 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752556AbZDWSAl (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:00:41 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 20:04:19 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: yuhong Cc: "Maciej W. Rozycki" , Andi Kleen , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: I/O APIC: Timer through 8259A revamp Message-ID: <20090423180419.GT13896@one.firstfloor.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:45:03AM -0700, yuhong wrote: > >  The new burst of breakage came with the invention of ACPI and its tables > > for interrupt routing for the APIC. > Yep, when NVIDIA and ATI entered the chipset market, who would have > predicted that it would cause more 8254 and APIC related troubles? Or > it would be years before it were finally fixed properly? Even worse, > ATI made chipsets before AMD and Intel introduced their 64-bit CPUs, > yet it was the x86-64 architecture where the attempts to fix the ATI > APIC 8254 timer issues were going to. Only later when it was finally > fixed properly was it backported to x86. I'm not sure what you mean here. The ATI timer fixes were done on both i386 and x86-64. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.